[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 34 (Wednesday, March 13, 1996)]
[House]
[Page H2190]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PERMISSION FOR MEMBER TO OFFER AMENDMENT OUT OF ORDER DURING FURTHER 
  CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2703, COMPREHENSIVE ANTITERRORISM ACT OF 1995

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during 
further consideration of the bill H.R. 2703, pursuant to House 
Resolution 380, I may be permitted to offer the amendment numbered 7 in 
House Report 104-480 out of the specified order and immediately 
following amendment No. 15.
  I spoke with the ranking minority member about this, and he indicated 
that he would have no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  Mr. COLEMAN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Speaker, I would like 
to ask the gentleman from California a question, if I might, and I 
would be happy to yield to him for that purpose. As I understood the 
amendment, it was gone over because the gentleman was not ready for 
presentation at the time it came up; is that correct?
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. COLEMAN. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. Mr. Speaker, the estimates we were given--they did 
not--a couple of amendments were dropped before us, and they did not 
hold a vote on one of them, so, yes, I was not here and I could not get 
over in time. I was here, but I just missed it by the time we got here.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, let 
me only ask one question that I had an interest in.
  I do not know; it may have just been the analysis of the amendment 
that was in error, but I did not understand, and I just wanted to ask 
this one question, if I might, and I would like to not object because I 
think what happened to the gentleman happens to a lot of Members, and I 
think it is right for all of us to try to accommodate them. But I 
certainly had a question with respect to the amendment with respect to 
a statement that I had read before. It said that before arresting 
individuals who had been reported as having been here illegally, State 
and local law enforcement agencies would have to confirm their status 
with the INS before arrest. Is that the gentleman's understanding of 
what the amendment reads?
  Mr. DOOLITTLE. If the gentleman will yield further, they are 
authorized to arrest and detain, but only after they have obtained 
confirmation from the INS. So they would have to call into the INS and 
get their confirmation that indeed this person is a criminal alien.
  Mr. COLEMAN. But, of course, that is before they are arrested. So a 
person could not even be detained while that is going on, is that 
the gentleman's understanding?

  Mr. DOOLITTLE. If I may add, typically this situation arises when 
they have stopped an individual for a traffic offense, and in the 
course of running the check this pops up. So that is kind of the normal 
circumstance when it would occur.
  Mr. COLEMAN. But of course that is not all circumstances.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to say to the gentleman, if the gentleman 
will help me answer that question during the time he has for the 
debate, I would not object because I think people ought to be entitled 
to offer their amendments that are made in order.
  Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.

                          ____________________